Have library access?
IP:44.200.194.255
  • Theses

解放資本主義:社會企業如何重構市場經濟?

Liberating Capitalism: How Could a Social   Enterprise Reconstruct Market Economy?

Advisor : 畢恆達

Abstracts


本論文建立在研究者多年研究社會理論的反思,以及自身投入社會企業經營實務的經驗基礎上,所提出的批判性社會企業理論。因此,研究者旨趣不在於探討當前社會企業理論,而在於提出本土實作觀點的社會企業理論。 為了達到這個目標,本論文分別從理論和實作兩個層面探討社會企業理論。在理論層面,研究者認為,一般普遍採取「以商業手段解決『社會問題』或達到『社會目的』」的說法定義社會企業,造成對「社會企業」嚴重的誤解。因為一般語用中的「社會問題」或「社會目的」是非常不嚴謹的概念,既存的企業都可以宣稱在解決某項社會問題或成就了某項社會目的。嚴格「社會問題」或「社會目的」的定義必須是指向「社會如何可能」這個社會存有論層面的課題,換言之,如果說社會企業就其樣態是以「以商業手段解決『社會問題』或達成『社會目的』」,那麼這裡所謂的「社會問題」或「社會目的」就必須是存有論上探討當前人類社會之為人類社會的價值與意義,以及究竟遭遇到甚麼樣的困境,使得「社會之為社會」的可能性受到嚴峻的挑戰。嚴謹的「社會企業」概念不能迴避這個基礎的存有論反思。 準此,研究者認為,當前人類社會發展主要受制於資本主義體制。資本主義文明帶了空前的繁榮也帶來了空前的社會困境,因而社會企業也就必須回到批判資本的脈絡下才能達到解決社會問題的目的。依據這樣的想法,本論文在理論部分以批判資本主義作為開展的起點,釐清究竟社會企業應當指向什麼樣的「社會問題」。 然而,「社會企業」這一概念即表明本身乃是實作導向的概念,也就是說,其目的不僅在於定義「社會問題」,更在於「解決社會問題」;因此,當在存有論層面探討社會企業指向的社會問題時,必須同時扣連到「問題解決」的方法論層面,是故,在理論探討的部分,研究者探討資本主義社會的一般性問題之外,也必須定位出具體可以行動改變或挑戰的議題,因此,研究者放棄一般關於資本主義研究中常用的,就歷史層面來看,資本主義發展(所必然遭遇)的「危機」概念,改以從行動者角度,提出「社會困境」的概念。從社會困境的角度,將一般性資本主義批判轉向具體社會困境批判。 也因為如此,具體社會困境的批判必須建立在每個具體社會特殊的資本主義處境作為分析起點,準此,研究者以「後進(資本主義)國家」作為分析台灣社會具體資本主義困境的分析視域。並以這個視域貫穿對市場、國家等概念的重新理解,以尋找社會企業作為一種解放資本主義、重構市場經濟的可能性。 在第二部分實作經驗的討論中,研究者以自身創設的社會企業為例,描述如何從表層的社會現象定位深層的社會困境、乃至於如何採取行動策略在解決表面的社會問題時,指向深層的社會困境。研究者認為「合作經濟」是挑戰資本主義經濟體制最重要的一個方法,然而,在資本主義社會中要形成「合作」的社會團結網絡,必須突破既有資本主義社會的格局,因此,如何模糊既有社會領域的邊界是重要的策略,也因此,研究者不採取傳統批判資本主義者,從生產領域出發,以階級鬥爭作為行動的策略方針,而是從「流通領域」出發,因為流通領域所具有社會領域界線模糊的特徵,將有助於尋找階級鬥爭以外、有助重新形塑社會團結的行動可能。

Parallel abstracts


This dissertation is based on the researcher reflecting on social theories for many years and the experience of his own self-employed social enterprise. Therefore, the researcher's interest is not to discuss the current social enterprise theory, but rather to bring up the theory of social enterprise from the viewpoint of local experience. For the purpose, this dissertation explores the social enterprise theory from the theory and practice two levels. On the theoretical level, the researcher argue that the common definition of social enterprises is ‘’solving social problems or accomplishing social goals through commercial methods’’ resulting in a serious misunderstanding of ‘’social enterprises’’. The ‘’social problems” or ‘’social goals’’ in common use is not a serious concept, so every enterprise can easy claim that its entrepreneurial purpose is to solve some kind of social problems or achieve some kind of social purposes. A serious definition of ‘’social problems’’ or “social goals’’ is must refer to the ontological question about ‘’how is a society possible?’’. In other words, if the social enterprise is to “solving the ‘social problems’ or achieve the ‘social goals’ by commercial methods”, the so-called “social problems” or “social goals” must be discussed on the ontological question about what the value and meaning of human society is and what kind of dilemma encountered results in the possibility of “how is a society possible” being severely challenged. The rigorous concept of “social enterprise” cannot avoid the reflection on this ontological foundation. At this point, the researcher believes that the current development of human society is mainly subject to Capitalist System. Capitalism with unprecedented prosperity has also brought unprecedented social dilemma. That is the reason why the social enterprise must return to the context of critique on capitalism to achieve the purpose of solving social problems. Based on this idea, this dissertation in the theoretical part is focus on of the critique on capitalism as a starting point to clarify what kind of “social problems” the social enterprises should point. However, the concept of “social enterprise” lies itself a concept of practice-oriented, that is, its purpose is not only to give a definition about “social problems” but also to “solve social problems”; therefore, when the social problems which is referred to the social enterprise are discussed on the ontological level, must also be linked to the “problem-solving” methodological level. Therefore, in the theoretical part of this dissertation, the researcher explores the general problems of Capitalist Society, but also targets to specific problems that could be changed or challenged by actions. So the researcher abandons the general concept of “crisis” that is commonly used in critical researches on the development of capitalism. Instead, from the point of view of the actor researcher use the concept of “social dilemma” on critique of capitalism. From the perspective of social dilemma, the critique would be from general to specific social contexts. Because of this, the critique of the concrete social dilemma must be based on the specific capitalist situation of each specific society as the starting point of the analysis. The researcher from the horizon of “late developing (capitalist) country” analyzes  Taiwan's specific capitalist social dilemma. And from this horizon researcher rethink what the market is and what the stat is in order to find a social enterprise as a liberation of capitalism, the possibility of restructuring the market economy. In the second part, the discussion on practical experience level, the researcher based on the experience of itself-employed social enterprise as an example to describe how to get positioning of deep social dilemma from the social phenomenon and even how to take action strategies in solving problems of social surface referring to deep social dilemma. Researchers believe that “cooperative economy” is the most important way to challenge the capitalist economic system. However, in Capitalist Society in order to form a cooperative social solidarity networks, we must break through the forms of the existed capitalist society. Therefor how make the boundary of social fields ambiguous is an important strategy, and therefore, the researcher does not take the traditional critical approach on capitalism, starting from the production field, the class struggle as a strategy of action, but from the circulation field. That is because of circulation field with the characteristics of ambiguous social boundaries would help to get new ways to re-build the social solidarity instead of the class struggle.

References


丘昌泰(2000)《公共管理-理論與實務手冊》。台北:元照。
林銘洲(2004)〈國內有機農業發展趨勢〉。取自:
陳玠廷(2014)《臺灣有機農業反身現代現象之研究》。臺灣大學生物產業傳播暨發展學研究所博士論文。
蔡晏霖(2016)〈農藝復興:臺灣農業新浪潮〉,《文化研究》,22,31-32。
蔡精強(2009)〈台灣有機農業發展概況與前景〉。取自:

Read-around